<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (8) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397397</link>
    <description>A secured creditor&#039;s SARFAESI remedies were treated as operating outside the winding up process, subject to protection of workmen&#039;s dues under Sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act, 1956. Challenges to SARFAESI measures, including a plea of limitation, were held to fall within the statutory remedy under Section 17 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, and Section 34 was noted to bar ordinary court jurisdiction on such matters. The Company Court&#039;s role was confined to safeguarding the Official Liquidator&#039;s participation in the distribution of sale proceeds for workmen&#039;s interest, and the limitation-based challenge was not maintainable before the Company Court or in appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=619872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397397</link>
      <description>A secured creditor&#039;s SARFAESI remedies were treated as operating outside the winding up process, subject to protection of workmen&#039;s dues under Sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act, 1956. Challenges to SARFAESI measures, including a plea of limitation, were held to fall within the statutory remedy under Section 17 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, and Section 34 was noted to bar ordinary court jurisdiction on such matters. The Company Court&#039;s role was confined to safeguarding the Official Liquidator&#039;s participation in the distribution of sale proceeds for workmen&#039;s interest, and the limitation-based challenge was not maintainable before the Company Court or in appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>